A Summary of the Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community 

Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, 

Indiana, 1981–2012

Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5225

Prepared in cooperation with the Indianapolis Department of Public Works, 

and CWA Authority, Inc.

A Summary of the Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community 

Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, 

Indiana, 1981–2012

Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5225

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Cover. Stream Ecosystem. (Painting by Rick Hill, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources.) 
A Summary of the Benthic-Invertebrate 

and Fish-Community Data from Streams in 

the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 

1981–2012

By David C. Voelker, Aubrey R. Bunch, Edward G. Dobrowolski, and Megan E. Shoda

Prepared in cooperation with the Indianapolis Department of Public Works, 

and CWA Authority, Inc.

Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5225

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2015

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials 

as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.

Suggested citation:

Voelker, D.C., Bunch, A.R., Dobrowolski, E.G., and Shoda, M.E., 2015, A summary of the benthic-invertebrate and 

fish-community data from streams in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, 1981–2012: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5225, 29 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20145225.

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)
iii

Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................2

Description of Study Area ..................................................................................................................2

History of the Cooperative Studies ....................................................................................................4

Methods of Investigation..............................................................................................................................5

Benthic Invertebrates ..........................................................................................................................5

Fish ..........................................................................................................................................................5

Condition of Benthic-Invertebrate Communities......................................................................................5

Benthic-Invertebrate Indexes ..........................................................................................................11

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT) Index ........................................................11

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index..............................................................................................................11

Invertebrate Community Index ................................................................................................11

Pollution-Tolerant versus -Intolerant Benthic Invertebrates ......................................................20

Condition of Fish Communities ..................................................................................................................24

Index of Biotic Integrity .....................................................................................................................26

Summary .......................................................................................................................................................28

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................28

Figures

1. Map showing location of the study area and site locations on the White River and 

tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana ....................................................3

2. Boxplots showing number of taxa of the benthic-invertebrate 

population, 1981–2012 ................................................................................................................10

3. Boxplots showing Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) 

Index scores, 1981–2012............................................................................................................14

4. Boxplots showing Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) scores, 1999–2012 ..........................................15

5. Boxplots showing Invertebrate Community Index (ICI) scores, 1999–2012........................19

6. Graphs showing the historical percentages of pollution-tolerant and -intolerant 

benthic invertebrates at select sites on the White River, Indiana, 1981–2012 .................21

7. Graphs showing the historical percentages of pollution-tolerant and -intolerant 

benthic invertebrates at select sites on the White River, Indiana, 1994–2012 .................22

8. Graphs showing the historical percentages of pollution-tolerant and -intolerant 

benthic invertebrates at White River tributary sites, Indiana, 1994–2012.........................23

9. Boxplots showing number of fish taxa collected, 1999–2012................................................25

10. Boxplots showing Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) scores, 1999–2012....................................27
iv

Tables

1. Sites included in this report that were sampled for benthic invertebrates 

and fish communities, 1981–2012...............................................................................................4

2. Number per square meter of benthic invertebrate taxa in samples 

collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis 

metropolitan area, Indiana, 1981–2012......................................................................................6

3. Abundance per square meter of benthic invertebrates in samples 

collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis 

metropolitan area, Indiana, 1981–2012......................................................................................8

4. Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Index scores for samples 

collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan 

area, Indiana, 1981–2012 ...........................................................................................................12

5. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index as an evaluation of water quality (Hilsenhoff, 1987) ...................15

6. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) scores for samples collected at the White River 

and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, 1981–2012 ......................16

7. Invertebrate Community Index (ICI) scores for samples collected at the White River 

and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, 1999–2012 ......................18

8. Invertebrate Community Index (ICI) scores for samples collected at the White 

River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, 1999–2012 ............24

9. Number of fish collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis 

metropolitan area, Indiana, 1999–2012....................................................................................24

10. Attributes of Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) classification, total IBI scores, 

and integrity classes from Karr and others (1986) ................................................................26

11. Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) scores for samples collected at the White River 

and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, 1999–2012 ......................26
v

Conversion Factors and Datum

Multiply By To obtain

Length

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

square mile (mi2

) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

square meter (m2

) 0.0002471 acre 

Flow rate

million gallons per day (Mgal/d) 0.04381 cubic meter per second (m3

/s)

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Abbreviations used in this report

CSO combined-sewer overflows

CSS combined-sewer system

DPW Department of Public Works

EPT Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera

HBI Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

IBI Index of Biotic Integrity

ICI Invertebrate Community Index

NAWQA National Water-Quality Assessment

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

WWTF wastewater-treatment facility

μm micrometer

A Summary of the Benthic-Invertebrate and 

Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis 

Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012 

By David C. Voelker, Aubrey R. Bunch, Edward G. Dobrowolski, and Megan E. Shoda

Abstract

Intermittently, during 1981–2012, the U.S. Geological 

Survey sampled sites in the White River and several tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area of Indiana for benthic 

invertebrates and fish communities. During 1981–87, one 

study focused on benthic-invertebrate data collection at three 

sites along the White River. During 1994–96, 21 sites were 

sampled for benthic invertebrates; after 1999, up to 13 sites 

were sampled for benthic invertebrates and fish communities. 

The information collected during these studies was used in 

conjunction with the Indianapolis Department of Public Works 

and CWA Authority, Inc.,1 programs to help improve overall 

health of the White River and its tributaries by reducing combined sewer overflows and other point and non-point sources 

of pollution in the Indianapolis area.

Beginning in 1994, the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and 

Trichoptera (EPT) Index and Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) 

were calculated. Beginning in 1999, the Invertebrate Community Index (ICI) also was calculated from the benthic-invertebrate data. Fish-community data were collected periodically 

from 1999 to 2012, from which an Index of Biotic Integrity 

(IBI) was calculated. 

Introduction

The Indianapolis Department of Public Works (DPW) 

was responsible for managing the combined-sewer system 

(CSS) in Indianapolis until 2009, when CWA Authority, 

Inc., took over the responsibilities for water and wastewater 

services in Indianapolis. A CSS is designed, constructed, 

and operated to carry both sanitary sewage and stormwater 

runoff in the same system. These entities are responsible 

for implementing control strategies to mediate the effects of 

1

 CWA Authority Inc., is a broad-based utility service company that 

operates as a Public Trust. More information can be found at https://www.

citizensenergygroup.com.

combined-sewer overflows (CSOs) on water quality of receiving streams in and around Marion County, Indiana, including 

the city of Indianapolis. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA;

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999), in its guidance 

document for monitoring and modeling of CSOs, states that 

baseline conditions of the receiving water need to be defined. 

Therefore, the Indianapolis DPW proposed using biological 

indicators for monitoring the overall health of the White River 

and its tributaries (City of Indianapolis, 2000). Evaluation of 

stream biota is one way to determine cumulative effects of 

CSOs because the aquatic organisms are affected by long-term 

exposure to a variety of environmental changes. It would be 

difficult to attribute existing biological conditions directly 

to the CSOs alone because biological sampling reflects the 

overall effects from all pollution sources entering the receiving waters. Therefore, the EPA has indicated that investigators 

generally should limit the use of diversity indexes as general 

indicators of environmental effects to comparisons within 

the study where sampling and sample analysis methods are 

consistent. Receiving waters in the study area include the 

White River, Pogues Run, Pleasant Run, Eagle Creek, and Fall 

Creek. Williams Creek and Buck Creek do not contain CSOs 

but can be subject to input from septic systems or sanitarysewer failures. The Nora (or Westfield Boulevard) site on 

the White River and the Williams and Buck Creek sites are 

considered for the purposes of this study to be the control (or 

reference) sites when comparing data within the study area, 

because of the limited amount of input from the Indianapolis 

sewer system. 

Biotic integrity was described by Karr and Dudley (1981) 

as the ability to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, 

and adaptive community of organisms having a species composition, diversity, and functional organization comparable 

to that of the natural habitat of a region. Biological integrity 

provides a key means of assessing stream ecosystems because 

stream biota are subject to a full range of environmental influences (chemical, physical, and biological). Many stream biota 

complete most, or all, of their life cycles in the water, thereby 

serving as continuous monitors of environmental quality. To 
2 Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012

achieve the objectives of the Clean Water Act (http://www.

epa.gov.r5water/pdf/ecwa_t1.pdf, accessed on April 10, 2002), 

comprehensive information about the ecological integrity of 

aquatic environments is needed. Biological criteria can help 

to identify water-quality impairments, support regulatory controls that address water-quality problems, and assess improvements in water quality from regulatory efforts. Measures of 

stream biota complement water-quality programs that focus on 

direct measures of chemical water quality and physical properties of the aquatic environment. 

Benthic invertebrates are used to assess stream quality 

because they occupy all stream habitats and have a wide 

range of feeding preferences. They also are good indicators of 

overall stream quality because they are not very mobile and 

react quickly to environmental stresses, and can be found in all 

but the most severely polluted habitats. Benthic invertebrates 

occupy the middle of the aquatic food chain and are a major 

food source for fish and other aquatic life. They are excellent indicators of biological integrity in aquatic environments 

(Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 1989) according to 

our knowledge of their life cycles and tolerance to environmental stresses.

While fish communities are more mobile than benthic 

invertebrates, they were sampled because they also are 

sensitive to water-quality conditions, with limited options to 

escape stressors in their environment. Fish communities also 

can represent water-quality conditions in a stream because 

of their sensitivity to a wide variety of environmental factors 

such as habitat degradation, siltation, pesticides, nutrients, and 

changes in streamflow. Diversity can be affected by colonization rates, the presence of suitable habitat, extinction rates, 

competition, predation, physical disturbances, pollution, and 

other factors (Crowder, 1990). 

In the early 1980s, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 

in cooperation with the Indianapolis DPW, began a study to 

assess benthic-invertebrate communities in the White River 

in response to changes and upgrades in wastewater-treatment 

facilities (WWTFs) in Indianapolis (Crawford and others, 

1992). In the 1990s, a second study was begun to assess biological communities in the White River and selected tributaries relative to CSO issues that the City was assessing (Renn, 

1998; Voelker and Renn, 2000). During 1999–2001, a third 

study was conducted that included benthic invertebrates and 

fish communities (Voelker, 2004). During 2003–4, the USGS 

continued to collect benthic-invertebrate samples; during 

2005–12, comparative studies remained in place to collect 

benthic-invertebrate and fish-community information (Voelker, 

2012, 2014). While the biological conditions of these streams 

cannot be solely attributed directly to effects from CSOs, 

the integrity of the biological communities do reflect overall 

effects from all sources entering the receiving waters. 

Purpose and Scope

This report presents the summary statistics for the 

benthic-invertebrate and fish communities at 13 sites for 

which there are long-term data available in and around Marion 

County, Ind. (fig. 1), with emphasis on data collected during 

1994–2012, although 3 of the sites have data that extend 

back to 1981. The report presents the biological data using 

indexes to assess the general health of the aquatic environment. Benthic-invertebrate communities are summarized using 

the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) index, 

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI), and Invertebrate Community 

Index (ICI). The ICI data are available only for samples collected during 1999–2012. Fish communities are summarized 

using an Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI), which was calculated 

during 1999–2012. Biological indexes are described, and the 

results of the index calculations are presented. 

Description of Study Area 

Indianapolis is the capital of Indiana and the largest city 

in the State. The city is incorporated with Marion County 

and covers approximately 402 square miles (mi2). Approximately 55 mi2

 of the metropolitian area has been serviced by 

a CSO system (fig. 1). In 2007, this system had approximately 

130 CSOs that discharged into the White River directly or via 

several of its tributaries in the area. An additional 220 mi2 of 

the metropolitan area uses separate sanitary and storm sewers. 

The remaining portion of Indianapolis utilizes private septic 

systems, but most of these areas are gradually being converted 

to sanitary sewers (http://www.citizensenergygroup.com/OurCompany/Our-Projects/Septic-Tank-Elimination-Program). 

The study area is in the central climate division of Indiana, 

which is characterized by hot, humid summers and cold, wet 

winters (Newman, 1966). The study area is encompassed by 

the Eastern Corn Belt Plains ecoregion (Woods and others, 1998), and crop production is the predominant land use 

outside of the urban areas of Indianapolis (Simon and Dufour, 

1997). 

The total drainage area of the White River is 5,372 

mi2

. The most downstream site sampled is Waverly, with a 

drainage area of 2,026 mi2. The most upstream site referred 

to in this report is the White River at Nora, with a drainage area of 1,219 mi2

 (Hoggatt, 1975) (table 1). In addition to the CSOs, large inputs to the White River are discharges from the Belmont and Southport WWTFs in the 

southern reaches of the study area and the Carmel WWTF 

approximately 3 river miles upstream from the Nora site. 

The Belmont WWTF has a capacity of 120 million gallons 

per day (Mgal/d), with peak flows up to 300 Mgal/d. The 
Introduction 3

MARION COUNTY

JOHNSON COUNTY

SHELBY COUNTY

MORGAN COUNTY

Stout

Harding

Fall

Creek

Nora

Williams

Creek

Morris

Pleasant Run

Pogues 

Run

Eagle

Creek

White

River

White

River

Fall Creek

Eagle Creek

Pogues

Run

Bean

Creek

Creek

Lick

Pleasant Run

HAMILTON COUNTY

Eagle 

Creek 

Reservoir

Geist Reservoir

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:100,000, 1983.

Albers equal area projection. Standard parallels 29°30' and 45°30', central meridian -86°.

INDIANAPOLIS

39°37'57"

39°55'23"

86°19'35" 86°04'36"

10 MILES

5 10 KILOMETERS

0

0

5

Buck

Creek

03352500

03353500

03353611

03353000

03353120

03361850

Williams

Creek

03351000

Ditch

Buck

Creek

Waverly

Wicker

Tibbs-Banta

Figure 1.

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the 

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83)

State

Area served by combined sewers

County boundary

Basin boundary

Low-head dam

EXPLANATION

03353120 U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging-station

 identification number and sampling site 

 Sampling site and name Nora

INDIANA

Figure 1. Location of the study area and site locations on the White River and tributaries in the 

Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana.
4 Benthic -Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012

Southport facility can handle 125 Mgal/d, with peak flows 

to 180 Mgal/d. This is about twice the flow capacity of the 

mid-1980s (Crawford and others, 1992). Together, the two 

Indianapolis WWTFs treat over 70 billion gallons of wastewater each year (www.citizensenergygroup.com/Wastewater.

aspx). With the completion (in 2025) of mediation measures 

to reduce sewer overflows, an additional 3.5 billion gallons 

of raw sewage is expected to be captured and treated (www.

citizensenergygroup.com/Wastewater.aspx).

History of the Cooperative Studies

The USGS has conducted biological sampling in the 

study area intermittently since 1981. The results of these 

studies were presented by Crawford and others (1992), Renn 

(1998), Voelker and Renn (2000), and Voelker (2004, 2012, 

2014). Study sites remained consistent throughout the entire 

period (1981–2012) with the exception of the most upstream 

site on the White River, which was originally sampled at Westfield Boulevard (1981–87), but was moved to the nearby Nora 

site for sampling during 1994–2012. These studies all included 

benthic invertebrates collected at least yearly during 1981–87, 

1994–96, 1999–2001, and 2003–12. Fish-community assessments were completed during 1999–2001, 2006, 2008, 2010, 

and 2012. 

Table 1. Sites included in this report that were sampled for benthic invertebrates and fish communities, 1981–2012.

[ddmmss, degrees minutes seconds; Ind., Indiana; mi, miles; DS, downstream; nr, near]

Station name1

U.S. 

Geological Survey 

station number

Latitude Longitude River 

mile

Drainage 

area

Year first sampled

Benthics Fish

White River (boat sites)

White River near Nora, Ind. 03351000 395435 −860620 247.9 1,219 1981 1999

White River at Morris Street, 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

394505086103001 394515 −861026 230.3 1,635 1994 1999

White River at Harding Street, 

Indianapolis, Ind.

03353193 394505 −861030 227.9 1,660 1994 1999

White River below Stout Generating Station, 

Indianapolis, Ind.

394234086120900 394234 −861209 226.2 1,898 1981 1999

White River at Tibbs-Banta Landfill 

near Southport, Ind.

394019086134601 394019 −861346 222.5 1,920 1994 2005

White River at Wicker Road 

near Southport, Ind.

393827086141701 393827 −861417 220.2 1,947 1994 1999

White River at Waverly, Ind. 03353660 393402 −861518 211.0 2,026 1981 1999

Tributary sites (wadable sites)

Buck Creek 1.2 mi DS Maze Road 

near Brookfield, Ind.

393749086030501 393749 −855656 1.9 81.9 1999 2000

Eagle Creek at Raymond Street, 

Indianapolis, Ind.

394613086114700 394411 −861148 1.2 209 1994 1999

Fall Creek at 16th Street, 

Indianapolis, Ind.

03352875 394720 −861040 1.3 317 1994 1999

Pleasant Run near South Meridian Street, 

Indianapolis, Ind.

394358086092100 394358 −860921 1.2 20.8 1994 1999

Tributary sites (headwater sites)

Pogues Run at Vermont Street, 

Indianapolis, Ind.

03352990 394617 −860825 2.5 8.87 1994 1999

Williams Creek at 96th Street, 

Indianapolis, Ind.

03351072 395537 −861020 4.8 17 1994 1999

1

BOLD type indicates short name used throughout text to identify sites.
Condition of Benthic-Invertebrate Communities 5

Methods of Investigation

Initially, three sites were sampled by Crawford and others (1992), then 21 sites by Renn (1998), 12 sites by Voelker 

(2004), and lastly, 13 by Voelker (2012, 2014). These sites 

were selected in coordination with the Indianapolis DPW, 

which was responsible for monthly surface-water sampling at 

or near those sites. In addition, several sites were selected to 

provide continuity of data collection from previous studies that 

would allow for a historical comparison of data at some sites. 

For this report, 13 sites that have long-term data are used to 

summarize the biological communities in the White River and 

its tributaries in and around Indianapolis (table 1). 

Benthic Invertebrates

Benthic invertebrates were collected once per year in late 

summer/early fall by Crawford and others (1992) and then 

twice a year during subsequent studies (Voelker and Renn, 

2000; Voelker, 2004, 2012, 2014). Samples for the latter 

studies were collected during periods of relatively low-flow, 

steady-state streamflow conditions in the spring (May or 

June), and in the late summer/early fall (September and October) unless streamflow conditions resulted in sampling-schedule changes. These time periods were selected to coincide with 

the aquatic stages of most benthic-invertebrate species. Three 

individual samples were collected from habitats where the 

greatest diversity and abundance of invertebrates was expected 

to occur. High diversity habitats are usually riffle sections, 

although when those sections were not available the best available habitat was sampled (see Voelker, 2004, for a description 

of where sampling occured). During 1981–87, Crawford and 

others (1992) collected benthic invertebrates using a Surber 

sampler, which had a 0.0929 square-meter (m2

) sample grid 

and a 1.024 micrometer (μm) mesh size, following the methods described by Greeson and others (1977). This was a fairly 

large mesh size, and some of the smaller invertebrates may 

not have been adequately represented in the samples. Since 

1994, benthic-invertebrate samples were collected at each site 

using a Surber sampler and a collection-net mesh opening of 

210 μm. Sampling followed the guidelines set forth in Britton 

(1988) and described in Renn (1998) and Voelker (2004). 

Benthic invertebrates were picked in the field for the 

study by Crawford and others (1992) and then sent to a laboratory for analysis, but the Renn (1998) and Voelker (2004, 

2012, 2014) studies submitted the entire sample to a contract 

laboratory where they were sorted and identified to the lowest 

possible taxonomy—generally genus and species. The laboratory calculated the number of organisms in the sample, the 

number of taxa, and the HBI for each set of three samples. 

The results of the three individual samples were combined 

to determine the EPT index, HBI (Hilsenhoff, 1987), and ICI 

(Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 1987, 1989) scores 

for each sample round at each site. The ICI was developed to 

provide a descriptive statistic that could be used to compare 

sites within a study area. The ICI consists of 10 structural and 

functional community metrics that describe the benthic-invertebrate community. 

Fish

Fish communities were sampled during the summer 

months of 1999, 2000, 2001, 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2012, 

following guidelines established by the USGS National 

Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program (Meador and 

others, 1993). Fish were collected using pulsed direct-current 

electrofishing techniques. Specially designed electrofishing 

boats were used at all the White River sites; a backpack or 

tote-barge mounted equipment was used at the tributary sites. 

Taxonomic nomenclature followed that established by Robins 

and others (1991) and by Nelson and others (2004). Fish data 

were used to calculate an IBI for the site sampled. 

Condition of Benthic-Invertebrate 

Communities

A complete list of benthic-invertebrate data for each 

sample was presented in Crawford and others (1992), Renn 

(1998), and Voelker (2004, 2012, 2014). From these data, the 

number of taxa (diversity) (table 2), the abundance (density) of 

benthic organisms (table 3), and various benthic-invertebrate 

indexes were calculated.

The number of benthic-invertebrate taxa identified at the 

White River sites ranged from 5 (Wicker, 1995) to 62 (Nora, 

2011) during 1981–2012 (table 2). The median number of 

taxa at sites along the White River ranged from a high of 40 

at the most upstream site (Nora), to a low of 27 at the most 

downstream site (Waverly) (fig. 2). On the tributary sites, the 

number of taxa ranged from 5 at Pogues (1995) to 62 at Buck 

(1999). The median number of taxa on the tributaries ranged 

from 32 at Pleasant to 53 at Buck (table 2, fig. 2). 

The median abundance (or density) of benthic-invertebrate organisms calculated using the data showed that the 

lowest sites on the White River were Wicker Road (6,552/m2) 

and Tibbs (24,162/m2) (table 3). Pogues had the lowest median 

abundance (5,431/m2), and Fall had the highest median abundance (18,033/m2

) of the tributary sites.
Table 2. Number per square meter of benthic invertebrate taxa in samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolit1981–2012. [--, no sample collected] Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasan

Data from Crawford and others, 1992 1981 34 -- -- 19 -- -- 23 -- -- -- -- 

1982 34 -- -- 15 -- -- 13 -- -- -- -- 

1983 23 -- -- 16 -- -- 17 -- -- -- -- 

1984 18 -- -- 19 -- -- 16 -- -- -- -- 

1985 30 -- -- 22 -- -- 20 -- -- -- -- 

1986 24 -- -- 20 -- -- 17 -- -- -- -- 

1987 29 -- -- 23 -- -- 21 -- -- -- -- 

Data from Voelker and Renn, 2000 May 1994 Sept. 1994 July 1995 Sept. 1995 July 1996 Sept. 1996 282013172622 17138182619 18105153022 ---- 11182828 1613715-- 24 1119515-- 19 12 -- 15 -- 7 -- 12 -- -- -- 17 -- 192612182929 7141013-- 11 12109151822 

Data from Voelker, 2004 May 1999 Sept. 1999 May 2000 Sept. 2000 May 2001 Sept. 2001 414043464842 403328433645 382331433329 232839293839 ------------ 194129424143 323233293831 -- 6256575861 323750423741 303234403235 203425323734 

 Data from Voelker, 2012 June 2003 46 45 33 32 -- 37 28 48 47 43 31 

 Nov. 2003 38 45 27 28 -- 17 23 48 45 35 33 

 May 2004 Sept. 2004 May 2005 

 Sept. 2005 

38

34

51

50

38

32

43

51

39

30

47

49

31

31

38

39

26

26

20

39

18

31

28

41

28

23

26

42

52

53

49

60

42

48

44

39

34

34

31

46

28

29

30

38
Table 2. Number per square meter of benthic invertebrate taxa in samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolit

1981–2012.—Continued

[--, no sample collected]

Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasan

 Data from Voelker, 2012—Continued

 June 2006 39 43 36 37 30 24 24 45 48 39 27 

 Oct. 2006 46 49 41 50 37 39 33 54 41 37 30 

 May 2007 38 44 37 33 38 26 29 53 42 30 30 

 Sept. 2007 44 35 37 31 37 43 35 59 40 40 38 

 June 2008 42 36 49 39 30 33 31 46 34 29 33 

 Sept. 2008 31 34 45 43 40 31 37 51 40 41 38 

Data from Voelker, 2014

July 2009 46 37 39 46 32 28 30 53 40 38 37 

Sept. 2009 46 39 42 35 30 29 26 37 41 34 44 

Aug. 2010 41 35 35 29 27 26 26 53 31 38 32 

Sept. 2010 43 41 33 33 32 34 26 52 49 42 31 

July 2010 62 52 51 37 43 40 38 43 42 40 46 

Sept. 2011 45 31 57 31 32 42 37 61 56 38 39 

May 2012 48 59 49 49 47 39 42 58 50 39 49 

Sept. 2012 46 49 41 50 32 50 39 60 52 43 53 

Minimum 13 8 5 11 7 5 7 37 12 7 9 

Median 40 38 37 31 30 31 27 53 41 35 32 

Maximum 62 59 57 50 47 50 42 62 56 46 53 
Table 3. Abundance per square meter of benthic invertebrates in samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolita1981–2012. [--, no sample collected] Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasan

Data from Crawford and others, 1992 1981 3,130 -- -- 2,790 -- -- 2,260 -- -- -- -- 

1982 3,000 -- -- 6,110 -- -- 9,920 -- -- -- -- 

1983 2,880 -- -- 1,920 -- -- 2,320 -- -- -- -- 

1984 3,660 -- -- 646 -- -- 658 -- -- -- -- 

1985 3,950 -- -- 1,410 -- -- 1,870 -- -- -- -- 

1986 3,020 -- -- 5,700 -- -- 4,780 -- -- -- -- 

1987 4,710 -- -- 26,500 -- -- 3,510 -- -- -- -- 

Data from Voelker and Renn, 2000 May 1994 Sept. 1994 July 1995 Sept. 1995 July 1996 Sept. 1996 2,400 4,000 8,400 5,500 42,000 3,900 1,800 4,000 290 5,000 18,000 7,800 2,000 950 420 5,700 11,000 3,700 ---- 2,100 8,200 24,000 140,000 3,500 5,900 1,400 8,600 -- 4,100 3,300 2,000 540 3,800 -- 1,200 4,500 -- 2,500 -- 2,400 -- 6,500 -- -- -- 12,000 -- 2,400 1,300 620 1,600 15,000 3,500 440 1,500 890 1,600 -- 1,000 4,200 1,900 780 2,600 2,200 5,400 

Data from Voelker, 2004 May 1999 Sept. 1999 May 2000 Sept. 2000 May 2001 Sept. 2001 36,084 33,655 129,778 21,205 30,864 16,401 5,145 49,755 6,021 28,865 14,621 32,303 18,873 22,009 7,675 70,300 20,344 30,717 17,370 64,864 10,434 11,962 73,281 20,017 ------------ 15,758 11,119 8,988 3,606 6,326 3,599 14,621 46,454 13,807 1,224 6,448 6,706 -- 11,406 35,453 11,022 15,766 14,761 27,416 28,546 22,364 12,228 48,406 9,092 79,140 46,095 39,568 30,990 15,109 15,726 26,031 29,694 27,391 5,070 13,218 3,513 

 Data from Voelker, 2012 June 2003 14,804 10,936 15,719 18,338 -- 4,062 6,354 26,591 9,888 30,932 31,104 

 Nov. 2003 3,132 3,663 743 1,381 -- 682 710 3,197 18,396 32,816 1,952 

 May 2004 Sept. 2004 May 2005 

 Sept. 2005 

39,267

10,172

8,177

9,508

2,720

2,709

9,361

5,443

7,420

1,478

6,003

10,699

25,539

10,872

28,801

13,150

18,991

18,198

41,883

16,580

20,161

10,664

7,829

2,598

14,499

24,976

15,590

3,111

27,172

10,875

22,550

3,976

35,281

6,591

6,484

9,483

5,644

14,660

17,061

12,070

16,315

10,290

20,297

2,723
Table 3. Abundance per square meter of benthic invertebrates in samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolit

1981–2012.—Continued

[--, no sample collected]

Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasan

 Data from Voelker, 2012—Continued

 June 2006 3,696 1,611 1,198 15,866 33,853 6,552 13,236 4,682 6,466 21,144 7,341 

 Oct. 2006 8,227 2,504 12,436 11,934 8,410 6,501 5,956 9,863 10,423 6,641 11,625 

 May 2007 23,620 4,463 8,522 29,102 23,304 9,476 9,716 12,798 20,236 28,639 16,659 

 Sept. 2007 15,059 23,469 29,766 11,177 24,162 8,661 13,522 11,130 10,064 27,054 15,766 

 June 2008 4,556 9,451 4,840 17,603 6,677 7,126 8,457 19,067 21,058 14,273 19,167 

 Sept. 2008 12,737 80,088 20,609 11,535 28,539 13,530 11,438 10,803 18,589 18,033 15,464 

Data from Voelker, 2014

July 2009 26,544 11,708 3,688 12,533 39,726 13,975 9,530 11,883 16,325 17,104 18,274 

Sept. 2009 69,909 121,378 1,067,068 36,967 39,852 39,558 32,920 26,896 27,753 52,693 22,716 

Aug. 2010 12,590 4,410 38,872 27,190 59,514 22,106 13,842 12,170 29,440 9,178 25,518 

Sept. 2010 36,583 25,776 33,404 78,401 58,617 4,657 28,592 20,556 8,145 19,730 27,179 

July 2010 19,214 12,540 6,526 26,967 34,240 3,911 29,956 47,124 27,782 22,540 7,861 

Sept. 2011 50,763 159,741 325,589 71,907 114,012 26,354 40,867 35,805 13,810 33,207 24,341 

May 2012 29,960 15,644 15,683 19,199 46,063 10,061 14,808 65,517 18,105 45,162 106,768 

Sept. 2012 44,254 8,672 13,645 24,832 67,045 4,313 13,247 17,664 22,446 24,718 5,475 

Minimum 2,400 290 420 1,381 6,677 540 658 3,197 620 440 780 

Median 12,590 9,017 10,850 17,370 24,162 6,552 9,623 14,761 14,405 18,033 14,341 

Maximum 129,778 159,741 1,067,068 140,000 114,012 39,558 46,458 65,517 48,406 79,140 106,768 
10 Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012

x

x

39 32 32 37 23 31 38

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

25 32 31 32 30 31

B. Tributary sites

A. White River sites

Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly

10

70

60

50

40

30

20

0

10

70

60

50

40

30

20

0

Buck Eagle Fall Pleasant Pogues Williams

Number of bentic invertebrate taxa identified at site

30

EXPLANATION 

x

x

o

o

75th percentile

25th percentile

Number of values

Upper detached

Lower detached

Lower outside

Lower adjacent

Upper adjacent

Upper outside

Median

Number of bentic invertebrate taxa identified at site

Figure 2. Number of taxa of the benthic-invertebrate population, 1981–2012. A, White River 

sites. B, Tributary sites.
Condition of Benthic-Invertebrate Communities 11

Benthic-Invertebrate Indexes

Three benthic-invertebrate indexes were calculated to 

describe the benthic-invertebrate population at sites. These 

include the EPT index, the HBI, and the ICI.

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT) 

Index 

The EPT index for each site was calculated from the 

number of taxa in the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and 

Trichoptera orders. These pollution-sensitive groups reflect 

better water-quality conditions as the number of taxa increase. 

During the 1981–2012 study period, the EPT scores on 

the White River ranged from 0 at Morris (1994, 1995), 

Harding (1994, 2000), and Waverly (1982) to 17 at Nora 

(2010) (table 4). The median scores at the White River sites 

ranged from 4 to 10 at sites downstream of the CSO influence, 

and was 13 at Nora—the only site upstream of CSOs (fig. 3). 

On the tributaries, EPT scores ranged from lows of 0 at 

Pleasant (1994) and Pogues (1994, 1995, 1999) to 17 at Buck 

(2007, 2010) (table 4). The median scores at these sites ranged 

from 7 at Fall, Pleasant, and Pogues to 14 at Buck (fig. 3). 

The EPT scores indicate that the greatest diversity of 

these pollution-intolerant organisms are found upstreamfrom or away-from the combined-sewer areas. Sites directly 

affected by CSOs or those located in the more urbanized areas 

show decreased diversity among these species. One exception 

to this is the Stout site where the improved EPT scores may be 

due to the stream reaeration, as the water flows over the lowhead dam just upstream of the sampling site.

The lowest number of observations of these pollutionintolerant species was at the Morris and Harding sites on the 

White River, and at the Fall, Pleasant, and Pogues sites on the 

tributaries (table 4). These sites all represent the more urbanized stream conditions and have the greatest impact from 

CSOs affecting water-quality conditions. The Harding site also 

was under very low-velocity conditions, and the substrate at 

the sample site was limited to silt and rip-rap. The Nora and 

Buck sites both had distinctly greater numbers of EPT organisms than the other sites. 

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

The HBI (Hilsenhoff, 1987) was developed to assess 

organic pollution through its effect on benthic-invertebrate species. It is calculated from pollution-tolerance values assigned 

to benthic-invertebrate species. The HBI is calculated using 

the number of individuals in each family and a tolerance value 

for that family, summing the products, and dividing that sum 

by the total number of arthropods in the sample. Scores can 

range from 0 to 10, and unlike the other indexes, the HBI score 

increases with decreasing water-quality conditions (table 5). 

The HBI scores on the White River ranged from a low 

of 4.33 (very good) at Waverly (2009) to 9.88 (very poor) 

also at the Waverly site (1982). Median HBI scores on the 

White River ranged from 5.47 (good) at Waverly to 9.12 (very 

poor) at Harding (fig. 4). Median scores at the Nora, Tibbs, 

and Wicker sites all rated “fair,” indicating fairly significant organic pollution present. The Morris and Harding HBI 

scores rated “very poor,” indicating severe organic pollution, 

while the median score at Stout rated “fairly poor,” indicating 

significant organic pollution at that site. The Waverly site was 

the only site where the HBI scores rated conditions as “good,” 

indicating only some organic pollution present.

On the tributaries, HBI scores ranged from a low of 2.86 

(excellent) at Buck (2001) to a high of 8.14 (poor) at Pogues 

(2004) (table 6). Median scores ranged from 5.35 (good) at 

Buck to 6.24 (fair) at Pleasant, while all other tributary (fig. 4)

sites also rated “fair” indicating fairly significant organic pollution at those sites. 

HBI scores at the tributary sites show that conditions at 

the Buck and Williams sites were better than those of the other 

tributary sites (fig. 4). The more urbanized sites at Fall, Pleasant, and Pogues all indicated the least favorable conditions for 

benthic invertebrates among the tributary sites.

Invertebrate Community Index

The ICI (Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 1987, 

1989) was developed to use 10 structural and functional 

metrics to describe the benthic-invertebrate communities. 

The ICI was developed to compare sites within a study area. 

The higher the ICI score, the better the water-quality conditions at that site. The ICI calculations were only done during 

the 1999–2012 studies.

The ICI scores on the White River ranged from a high 

of 46 at Nora (June 2008 and August 2010) to 8 at Harding 

(May 2008) (table 7). The median scores at the White River 

sites ranged from 35 at Nora to 20 at Harding. Figure 5 shows 

that the median ICI scores are all lower after the river flows 

through the CSO-affected areas than at the Nora site located 

upstream of the CSO influences.

On the tributaries, ICI scores ranged from 52 at Buck 

(September 2004) to 4 at Pogues (May 1999) during 1999–

2012 (table 7). The median scores during this period ranged 

from 44 (Buck) to 27 (Fall) (fig. 5). The remaining tributary 

sites had median scores from 29 to 37, and these scores were 

higher than all sites on the White River except for Nora. 

The ICI scores, which incorporate the EPT and HBI 

scores, also indicate that the best conditions in support of 

healthy benthic-invertebrate communities are at the Nora and 

Buck sites. On the White River, data support the observation 

that the most impaired communities are located at sites most 

impacted by CSOs and are located in the more urbanized 

areas.
Table 4. Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Index scores for samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis Indiana, 1981–2012.—Continued [--, no sample collected] Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasan

Data from Crawford and others, 1992 1981 14 -- -- 2 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- 

1982 11 -- -- 1 -- -- 0 -- -- -- -- 

1983 6 -- -- 3 -- -- 6 -- -- -- -- 

1984 5 -- -- 2 -- -- 8 -- -- -- -- 

1985 9 -- -- 4 -- -- 3 -- -- -- -- 

1986 13 -- -- 8 -- -- 8 -- -- -- -- 

1987 10 -- -- 5 -- -- 7 -- -- -- -- 

Data from Voelker and Renn, 2000 May 1994 7 5 3 -- 5 2 2 -- 7 1 0 

Sept. 1994 6 0 0 -- 4 6 6 -- 4 3 3 

July 1995 6 0 1 3 4 2 3 -- 5 3 2 

Sept. 1995 7 3 3 5 5 4 4 -- 5 4 4 

 July 1996 7 7 6 8 -- -- -- -- 6 -- 2 

 Sept. 1996 6 4 4 6 5 4 4 -- 5 3 5 

Data from Voelker, 2004 May 1999 12 2 3 4 -- 4 6 -- 8 4 2 

Sept. 1999 13 5 2 5 -- 9 8 15 7 6 7 

May 2000 13 1 0 4 -- 2 4 10 8 4 2 

Sept. 2000 10 6 4 6 -- 7 6 16 11 6 5 

May 2001 15 4 1 6 -- 5 6 16 8 5 3 

Sept. 2001 12 5 5 8 -- 6 6 16 10 6 5 

Data from Voelker, 2012 June 2003 12 7 4 6 -- 3 4 15 11 5 5 

Nov. 2003 16 8 2 12 -- 4 7 14 8 6 4 

May 2004 9 5 4 5 7 2 6 12 6 2 4 

Sept. 2004 11 5 3 8 6 5 5 13 11 4 6 

May 2005 16 5 7 6 6 2 3 10 9 4 6 

Sept. 2005 14 6 5 7 7 7 8 14 11 7 7 
Table 4. Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Index scores for samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis Indiana, 1981–2012.—Continued[--, no sample collected]

Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasan

 Data from Voelker, 2012—Continued

 June 2006 15 6 6 9 12 6 12 7 11 9 4 

 Oct. 2006 16 6 5 12 11 9 9 15 6 6 7 

 May 2007 13 8 5 8 10 4 5 11 7 4 4 

 Sept. 2007 10 4 5 7 9 9 11 17 12 7 10 

 June 2008 13 6 4 13 7 6 6 9 2 5 6 

 Sept. 2008 9 5 6 10 12 6 6 8 10 8 8 

Data from Voelker, 2014

July 2009 15 6 3 14 9 8 8 13 7 7 7 

Sept. 2009 9 6 2 8 9 5 8 13 9 6 8 

Aug. 2010 17 6 7 10 8 8 9 17 9 8 6 

Sept. 2010 14 8 6 10 12 9 8 14 9 11 10 

July 2010 15 14 4 8 11 5 9 11 6 7 5 

Sept. 2011 9 3 6 10 12 9 12 15 9 9 6 

May 2012 11 8 4 7 7 4 9 13 6 7 6 

Sept. 2012 11 4 1 9 7 7 8 16 9 7 9 

Minimum 5 0 0 1 6 2 0 7 2 1 0 

Median 13 6 4 10 9 8 9 14 9 7 7 

Maximum 17 14 7 14 12 9 12 17 12 11 10 
14 Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012

o

39 32 32 37 23 31 38

25 32 31 32 30 31

B. Tributary sites

A. White River sites

Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly

5

20

15

10

0

Buck Eagle Fall Pleasant Pogues Williams

Number of Ephemeroptera, Plrecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) taxa Number of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) taxa

5

20

15

10

0

30

EXPLANATION 

x

x

o

o

75th percentile

25th percentile

Number of values

Upper detached

Lower detached

Lower outside

Lower adjacent

Upper adjacent

Upper outside

Median

Figure 3. Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Index scores, 1981–2012. A, White River 

sites. B, Tributary sites.
Condition of Benthic-Invertebrate Communities 15

25 32 31 32 30 31

B. Tributary sites

A. White River sites

o

x

x

o

39 32 32 37 23 31 38

Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly

5

11

10

9

8

7

6

4

3

9

8

7

6

5

4

2

Buck Eagle Fall Pleasant Pogues Williams

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) score Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) score

30

EXPLANATION 

x

x

o

o

75th percentile

25th percentile

Number of values

Upper detached

Lower detached

Lower outside

Lower adjacent

Upper adjacent

Upper outside

Median

Figure 4. Hilsenhoff Biotic 

Index (HBI) scores, 1999–2012. 

A, White River sites. B, Tributary 

sites.

Table 5. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index as an evaluation of water quality (Hilsenhoff, 1987).

Biotic Index Score Water-quality rating Degree of organic pollution

0.00–3.50 Excellent No apparent organic pollution.

3.51–4.50 Very good Possible slight organic pollution.

4.51–5.50 Good Some organic pollution.

5.51–6.50 Fair Fairly significant organic pollution.

6.51–7.50 Fairly poor Significant organic pollution.

7.51–8.50 Poor Very significant organic pollution.

8.50–10.00 Very poor Severe organic pollution.
Table 6. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) scores for samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, [--, no sample collected] Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasan

Data from Crawford and others, 1992 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 5.33 5.99 6.69 5.86 6.18 5.03 5.69 -------------- -------------- 7.19 8.41 7.77 6.12 6.88 5.62 5.06 -------------- -- 7.35 -- -- 9.88 -- -- 6.12 -- -- 5.21 -- -- 5.92 -- -- 5.34 -- -- 5.3 -- -------------- -------------- -------------- 

Data from Voelker and Renn, 2000 May 1994 Sept. 1994 July 1995 Sept. 1995 July 1996 Sept. 1996 5.4 5.2 4.4 4.7 5.2 4.8 5.9 7.96 7.4 6.9 9 9.2 5.9 6.4 6.8 7 8.4 9.4 ---- 5.4 4.7 6.1 6.4 5.9 4.9 5.6 5.5 -- 5.7 6 5.8 6.3 6.8 -- 6.3 6 -- 5.2 -- 5.4 -- 4.8 -- -- -- 4.9 -- 6 6.8 6.6 6.7 6.1 6.2 5.9 6.7 6.7 6.6 -- 4.9 6 6.4 7.1 6.5 6.2 6.5 

Data from Voelker, 2004 May 1999 Sept. 1999 May 2000 Sept. 2000 May 2001 Sept. 2001 6.28 6.08 6.8 5.62 6.09 4.95 7.74 9.5 6.98 8.85 7.93 8.2 7.82 9.59 7.8 9.09 8.04 8.8 7.4 7.01 7.43 6.53 7.1 5.73 ------------ 8.41 5.56 7.79 7.79 7.41 5.56 7.41 5.9 7.29 7.29 7.17 5.63 -- 5.2 6.97 5.78 2.86 5.36 7.19 6.92 6.6 5.78 6.88 5.5 6.45 6.63 7.59 6.37 7.25 5.69 7.87 7.28 7.91 6.71 7.24 7.34 

Data from Voelker, 2012 June 2003 Nov. 2003 May 2004 Sept. 2004 May 2005 

 Sept. 2005 

 6.36 

 5.79 

 6.21 

 5.92 

 6.73 

 4.85 

 7.76 

 6.84 

 7.74 

 7.17 

 7.16 

 8.34 

 9.04 

 8.55 

 7.02 

 6.66 

 8.49 

 9.13 

 7.25 

 6.23 

 7.68 

 6.18 

 6.81 

 6.48 

--

--

 6.57 

 5.85 

 7.2 

 5.59 

 8.12 

 6.45 

 7.37 

 6.67 

 7.77 

 5.47 

 7.51 

 6.03 

 7.18 

 5.97 

 7.48 

 5.37 

 5.93 

 4.21 

 5.84 

 5.59 

 6.72 

 5.26 

 6.91 

 6.59 

 6.78 

 5.64 

 6.18 

 5.6 

 7.32 

 6.41 

 7.74 

 7.19 

 7.05 

 7.76 

 6.51 

 6.27 

 7.35 

 6.4 

 7.08 

 6.32 
Table 6. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) scores for samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, [--, no sample collected]

Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasan

 Data from Voelker, 2012—Continued

 June 2006 4.67 7.59 7.1 5.53 5.92 5.37 5.67 6.05 5.61 7.14 6.8 

 Oct. 2006 5.71 6.83 8 5.65 5.57 5.65 5.79 6 5.45 6.39 6.8 

 May 2007 6.12 7.87 8.62 6.59 7.79 8.19 7.19 6.88 6.83 8 6.88 

 Sept. 2007 5.38 9.11 7.18 6.38 5.53 5.45 5.19 5.26 5.33 6.56 6.14 

 June 2008 5.77 7.44 6.87 5.75 6.09 6.08 6.65 5.84 5.62 5.83 4.59 

 Sept. 2008 5.77 9.55 9.11 6.98 6.07 7.4 6.38 5.99 6.68 6.07 5.78 

Data from Voelker, 2014

July 2009 5.57 7.36 7.29 5.54 5.43 5.04 4.57 5.72 5.45 5.36 5.8 

Sept. 2009 6.12 9.39 8.96 8.09 5.22 7.18 4.33 5.51 5.92 6 5.84 

Aug. 2010 5 8.52 9.76 5.88 5.77 6.55 5.47 4.93 5.72 5.39 6.38 

Sept. 2010 5.5 9.07 9.28 6.73 4.97 6.81 4.48 4.67 6.77 5.87 6.1 

July 2010 5.39 5.57 6.5 5.67 6.03 5.84 5.47 5.47 5.86 5.7 6.42 

Sept. 2011 5.78 9.76 9.35 6.69 5.61 6.28 5.81 5.12 6.22 5.98 6.38 

May 2012 6.05 6.73 7.44 6.74 6.55 6.57 6.31 5.51 6.69 6.27 5.99 

Sept. 2012 5.89 8.96 9.7 7.08 5.86 5.93 5.83 5.22 6.73 6.23 6.44 

Minimum 4.4 5.57 5.9 4.7 4.9 5.37 4.33 2.86 5.33 4.9 4.59 

Median 5.68 8.74 9.12 6.71 5.69 6.42 5.47 5.35 6.07 5.93 6.24 

Maximum 6.73 9.76 9.76 8.09 6.57 8.41 9.88 6.97 7.19 7.76 7.91 
Table 7. Invertebrate Community Index (ICI) scores for samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, In[--, no sample collected] Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasan

Data from Voelker, 2004 May 1999 36 16 16 12 -- 14 20 -- 26 18 12 

 Sept. 1999 38 22 12 26 -- 30 30 48 22 22 30 

 May 2000 36 14 8 18 -- 14 18 30 26 16 10 

 Sept. 2000 32 28 20 26 -- 24 30 50 34 28 32 

 May 2001 32 22 16 22 -- 22 22 48 26 20 22 

 Sept. 2001 32 22 26 30 -- 26 32 50 38 30 30 

 Data from Voelker, 2012 June 2003 34 24 16 24 -- 16 18 36 34 26 24 

 Nov. 2003 42 26 12 32 -- 16 24 42 34 30 26 

 May 2004 28 20 20 26 26 12 22 46 30 12 20 

 Sept. 2004 32 22 16 30 28 26 24 52 38 20 24 

 May 2005 36 22 24 24 20 14 16 32 32 20 24 

 Sept. 2005 36 24 22 32 34 26 26 44 42 26 32 

 June 2006 42 22 26 36 32 22 30 34 34 30 24 

 Oct. 2006 42 22 22 42 36 34 32 40 28 24 30 

 May 2007 34 28 22 28 32 20 22 36 30 20 26 

 Sept. 2007 28 18 26 28 26 30 34 48 40 30 40 

 June 2008 46 30 20 36 24 26 24 28 20 20 26 

 Sept. 2008 34 26 30 30 34 22 24 32 32 34 46 

Data from Voelker, 2014 July 2009 42 22 16 34 26 26 24 38 34 28 40 

Sept. 2009 30 28 22 26 28 20 28 48 36 38 40 

Aug. 2010 46 28 22 30 28 26 30 50 24 34 28 

Sept. 2010 38 28 22 32 42 26 26 50 32 34 42 

July 2010 36 38 18 28 34 26 28 43 28 32 28 

Sept. 2011 32 18 28 28 40 30 40 50 30 32 38 

May 2012 30 26 18 26 28 20 28 44 26 28 30 

Sept. 2012 34 18 16 26 26 28 32 46 34 26 34 

Minimum 28 14 8 12 20 12 16 28 20 12 10 

Median 35 22 20 28 28 25 26 44 32 27 29 

Maximum 46 38 30 42 42 34 40 52 42 38 46 
Condition of Benthic-Invertebrate Communities 19

25 26 26 26 24 26

B. Tributary sites

A. White River sites

26 26 26 26 18 26 26

x

x

Invertebrate Community Index (ICI) score

x

x

Invertebrate Community Index (ICI) score

Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly

10

60

50

40

30

20

0

Buck Eagle Fall Pleasant Pogues Williams

10

60

50

40

30

20

0

30

EXPLANATION 

x

x

o

o

75th percentile

25th percentile

Number of values

Upper detached

Lower detached

Lower outside

Lower adjacent

Upper adjacent

Upper outside

Median

Figure 5. Invertebrate Community Index (ICI) scores, 1999–2012. A, White River sites. B, Tributary sites.
20 Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012

Pollution-Tolerant versus -Intolerant Benthic 

Invertebrates

Three sites on the White River (Nora, Stout, and 

Waverly; fig. 1) were originally selected to observe changes 

in the benthic-invertebrate population with changes to the 

City’s WWTFs. A plot of the yearly (August through October) 

historical data showing the percentage of pollution-tolerant 

versus -intolerant benthic invertebrates, indicates that at 

the three sites having data since 1981 (fig. 6), the Nora and 

Waverly sites show an increase in the percentage of tolerant 

invertebrates. At the Nora site, there is an overall decrease in 

the number of pollution-intolerant benthic invertebrates with a 

corresponding increase in the pollution-tolerant numbers. During 1981–99, the intolerant species were predominant except 

for 1983 and 1985. During 2000–12, the opposite was true, 

where more tolerant invertebrates were present in samples 

with the exception of 2006, 2010, and 2011. This reversal may 

have been caused, in part, by a chemical release into the White 

River and resultant fish kill in late 1999 (Indiana Department 

of Environmental Management, 2000).

In 1983, Indianapolis upgraded its two sewage-treatment 

facilities to tertiary treatment, including ozonation of the final 

effluent (Crawford and others, 1992). Almost immediately, the 

two sites being monitored downstream of the WWTFs at that 

time (Stout and Waverly) showed signs of improved conditions in the benthic-invertebrate population. The ozonation of 

effluents was then replaced with chlorination in 1994 (Paul 

Werderitch, Indianapolis DPW, personal commun., 2011). 

Within 1 year of that conversion, increasing numbers of pollution-tolerant invertebrates were observed at Stout, and within 

5 years at Waverly (fig. 6). In 2013, ultraviolet radiation of the 

effluent was introduced at the Belmont WWTF, supplemented 

with chlorination during wet-weather, high-flow events. However, no additional sampling was scheduled to determine how 

this change might affect biological communities downstream 

of the WWTFs.

The four additional sites on the White River, at which 

sampling began in 1994, all have predominantly larger numbers of pollution-tolerant species than pollution-intolerant 

species (fig. 7). Only at the Tibbs site, where sampling began 

in 2004, does there generally appear to be more pollutionintolerant benthic invertebrates present (fig. 7).

Sites on the tributaries show an increase in the number of 

pollution-tolerant benthic invertebrates at the Buck, Pogues, 

and Williams sites (fig. 8). Of these three sites, the Pogues site 

was predominantly pollution-tolerant invertebrates, and their 

numbers have been increasing since 1984. Similarly, the Pleasant site has been predominantly pollution-tolerant benthic 

invertebrates, but unlike the Pogues site, the numbers have 

been decreasing during the study period. At both the Pleasant 

and Pogues sites, the number of pollution-intolerant benthic 

invertebrates has increased since the mid-1990s, albeit in 

small numbers.
Condition of Benthic-Invertebrate Communities 21

Stout 

Nora 

Waverly

Tolerant Intolerant

EXPLANATION

Year

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Pollution-tolerant and -intolerant benthic invertebrates, in percent

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

Figure 6. Historical percentages of pollution-tolerant and -intolerant benthic invertebrates at select sites on the White River, Indiana, 1981–2012.
22 Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012

Morris 

Harding 

Tibbs

Wicker 

Tolerant Intolerant

EXPLANATION

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

100

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Pollution-tolerant and -intolerant benthic invertebrates, in percent

Year

Figure 7. Historical percentages of pollution-tolerant and -intolerant benthic invertebrates at select sites on the White River, Indiana, 1994–2012.
Condition of Benthic-Invertebrate Communities 23

Buck

Eagle 

Fall

Pleasant 

Pogues

Williams 

Tolerant Intolerant

EXPLANATION

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Pollution-tolerant and -intolerant benthic invertebrates, in percent

Year

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Figure 8. Historical percentages of pollution-tolerant and -intolerant benthic invertebrates at White River tributary sites, Indiana, 1994–2012.
24 Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012

Condition of Fish Communities

During the course of the studies by Voelker (2004, 2012, 

2014), 69 distinct taxa and 1 hybrid were identified on the 

White River, and 69 taxa and 3 hybrids were identified on the 

tributaries. On the White River, the number of species identified ranged from 14 at Nora in 2001 to 34 at both Tibbs and 

Wicker in 2012 (table 8). The median number of taxa ranged 

from 16 at Nora to 27 at Stout (fig. 9). The number of individual fish collected during that same time period ranged from 

61 at Nora in 2000 to 1,017 at Harding in 2012 (table 9). The 

median number of fish collected on the White River ranged 

from 136 at Waverly to 428 at Tibbs (table 9). On the tributaries, the number of species identified ranged from 6 at Pogues 

in 2010 to 41 at Buck in 2000 (table 8). The number of fish 

collected ranged from 62 at Pogues in 2012 to 2,697 at Pleasant 

in 1999. The median number of taxa collected on the tributaries 

during 1999–2012 ranged from 7 at Pogues to 33 at Buck.

Table 8. Invertebrate Community Index (ICI) scores for samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis 

metropolitan area, Indiana, 1999–2012.

[--, no sample collected]

Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasant Pogues Williams

Data from Voelker, 20041

 1999 16 22 22 25 -- 24 22 -- 25 33 14 7 25

 2000 15 29 23 30 -- 23 17 41 23 30 14 7 30

 2001 14 27 23 32 -- 21 16 36 23 32 14 7 21

 Data from Voelker, 20121

 2006 24 18 17 22 24 23 22 31 13 25 17 8 17

 2008 23 25 23 27 23 21 16 34 20 26 19 11 18

Data from Voelker, 2014

2010 18 23 20 26 26 20 24 32 22 24 17 6 13

2012 16 27 26 28 34 34 27 25 19 21 14 7 11

Minimum 14 18 17 22 23 20 16 25 13 21 14 6 11

Median 16 25 23 27 25 23 22 33 22 26 14 7 18

Maximum 24 29 23 30 34 34 27 41 25 33 19 11 30

 1Some values have changed since previous publication due to changes in Indiana Department of Environmental Management methodologies.

Table 9. Number of fish collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, 1999-2012.

[--, no sample collected]

Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasant Pogues Williams

Data from Voelker, 20041

 1999 184 382 264 299 -- 366 233 -- 569 594 2,697 808 2,325

 2000 61 1,012 805 719 -- 304 84 1,241 1,288 658 1,151 474 1,487

 2001 157 672 208 690 -- 341 56 969 944 787 697 312 755

 Data from Voelker, 20121

 2006 176 120 95 178 269 132 110 475 212 346 809 412 1,108

 2008 205 355 184 346 587 391 157 697 633 401 1,173 399 459

Data from Voelker, 2014

2010 185 107 153 257 211 211 136 460 334 317 128 201 409

2012 136 488 1,017 516 932 534 408 169 567 539 345 62 346

Minimum 61 107 95 178 211 132 56 169 212 317 128 62 346

Median 176 382 208 346 428 341 136 586 569 539 809 399 755

Maximum 205 1,012 1,017 719 932 534 408 1,241 1,288 787 2,697 808 2,325

 1Some values have changed since previous publication due to changes in Indiana Department of Environmental Management methodologies.
Condition of Fish Communities 25

o

7 7 7 7 4 7 7

6 7 7 7 7 7

B. Tributary sites

A. White River sites

Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly

10

50

20

0

Buck Eagle Fall Pleasant Pogues Williams

15

40

35

30

25

20

10

Number of fish taxa collected at site Number of fish taxa collected at site

40

30

30

EXPLANATION 

x

x

o

o

75th percentile

25th percentile

Number of values

Upper detached

Lower detached

Lower outside

Lower adjacent

Upper adjacent

Upper outside

Median

Figure 9. Number of fish taxa collected, 1999–2012. A, White River sites. B, Tributary sites.
26 Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012

Index of Biotic Integrity

Fish data were analyzed using the Indiana IBI developed 

by Simon and Dufour (1997) for sites in the Eastern Cornbelt 

Plains Ecoregion. The IBI incorporates various metrics 

including species richness, composition, presence/absence 

of indicator species, trophic and reproductive functions, and 

overall abundance and (or) individual conditions. Scores for 

each metric are combined, and the higher the resultant score, 

the healthier the aquatic ecosystem (table 10).

The IBI scores in the White River ranged from 20 (very 

poor) at Harding in 2006 to 46 (good) at Tibbs in 2012 (table 

11). Median IBI scores ranged from 34 at Harding to 42 at 

Morris and Stout (fig. 10). It should be noted that the low 

score of 22 at the Nora site came less than 1 year after the 

December 1999–January 2000 fish kill upstream because of 

a chemical release into the White River (Indiana Department 

of Environmental Management, 2000), which had a negative 

effect on the IBI at the site.

On the tributaries, the IBIs ranged from 24 (very poor) at 

Pogues in 2012 to 44 (good) at Buck, Fall, and Williams over 

several years (table 10). Median IBI scores on the tributaries 

ranged from 34 (poor) at Pogues to 42 (fair) at Buck, Fall, and 

Williams.

Table 10. Attributes of Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) classification, total IBI scores, and integrity classes from 

Karr and others (1986).

Total IBI score Integrity class Attributes

58–60 Excellent Comparable to the best situation without human disturbance; all regionally expected species for the habitat stream size, including the most tolerant forms, 

are present with a full array of age (size) classes; balanced trophic structure.

48–52 Good Species richness somewhat below expectation, especially owing to the loss of 

the most tolerant forms; some species are present with less than optimal abundances or size distributions; trophic structure shows some signs of stress.

40–44 Fair Signs of additional deterioration including loss of intolerant forms, fewer species, highly skewed trophic structure; older age classes of top predators may 

be rare.

28–34 Poor Dominated by omnivores, tolerant forms, and habitat generalists; few top carnivores; growth rates and condition factors commonly depressed; hybrids and 

diseased fish often present. Repeated sampling finds no fish.

12–22 Very Poor Few fish present, mostly introduced or tolerant forms; hybrids common; disease, 

parasites, fin damage, and other abnormalities regular.

Table 11. Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) scores for samples collected at the White River and tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan 

area, Indiana, 1999–2012.

[--, no sample collected]

Sample date Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly Buck Eagle Fall Pleasant Pogues Williams

Data from Voelker, 2004 

 1999 34 38 32 36 -- 36 34 -- 40 42 36 34 42

 2000 22 44 36 40 -- 38 24 44 40 42 30 34 42

 2001 36 42 36 42 -- 38 26 42 42 42 34 34 44

 Data from Voelker, 20121

 2006 36 30 20 34 34 38 36 42 38 44 38 34 44 

 2008 44 44 32 44 42 44 36 44 42 42 42 34 42

Data from Voelker, 2014

2010 36 34 32 42 38 34 34 40 42 44 32 34 38

2012 40 42 40 42 46 44 42 36 34 42 38 24 36

Minimum 22 30 20 34 34 34 24 36 34 42 30 24 38

Median 36 42 34 42 40 38 34 42 40 42 36 34 42

Maximum 44 44 40 44 46 44 42 44 42 44 42 34 44

 1Some values have changed since previous publication due to changes in Indiana Department of Environmental Management methodologies.
Condition of Fish Communities 27

7 7 7 7 4 7 7

6 7 7 7 7 7

B. Tributary sites

A. White River sites

o

Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) score

x

Nora Morris Harding Stout Tibbs Wicker Waverly

25

50

45

40

35

30

20

Buck Eagle Fall Pleasant Pogues Williams

25

55

50

45

35

30

20

Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) score

40

30

EXPLANATION 

x

x

o

o

75th percentile

25th percentile

Number of values

Upper detached

Lower detached

Lower outside

Lower adjacent

Upper adjacent

Upper outside

Median

Figure 10. Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) scores, 1999–2012. A, White River sites. B, Tributary sites.
28 Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, Indiana, 1981–2012

Summary 

The U.S. Geological Survey, along with the Indianapolis Department of Public Works (DPW), and eventually with 

CWA Authority, Inc., maintained a cooperative program intermittently during 1981–2012 to assess biological communities 

and streambed-sediment chemistry in the White River and 

selected tributaries in the Indianapolis metropolitan area of 

Indiana. Three sites were initially sampled in the 1981 study 

(Crawford and others, 1992), 21 sites were sampled by Renn 

(1998), and 13 sites (7 on the White River and 6 on tributaries) were sampled by Voelker (2004, 2012, 2014) biannually 

for benthic invertebrates, and during 1999–2001, 2006, 2008, 

2010, and 2012 for fish communities. The data collected in 

these studies complement the Indianapolis DPW and CWA 

Authority, Inc., surface-water monitoring programs. The 

information gathered is being used in conjunction with 

the programs to reduce combined-sewer overflows (CSOs) 

and other point and non-point sources of pollution in the 

Indianapolis area. 

Historical biological data were reviewed to describe the 

condition of the biological communities over time. For sites on 

the White River, available historical data for each of the three 

indexes (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera [EPT], 

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index [HBI], and Invertebrate Community 

Index [ICI] all show that the benthic-invertebrate conditions 

are best at the Nora site. The Nora site is the most upstream 

study site, near where the White River enters Indianapolis 

(and Marion County), and upstream of the CSO area. The 

poorest conditions of the benthic-invertebrate communities are 

at the Morris and Harding sites, which are located in the more 

urbanized reach of the river where the CSOs are located. The 

indexes indicate some improvement in the benthic-invertebrate 

communities at the Stout and Tibbs sites, and to a lesser extent 

at the Wicker and Waverly sites further downstream of the 

CSOs and wastewater-treatment facilities (WWTFs). 

For the tributary sites, historical data describe the Buck 

Creek and Williams Creek sites—which have no CSOs entering them—as having better benthic-invertebrate communities 

than other tributary sites. Only the Eagle Creek site scored 

slightly better than the Williams Creek site when reviewing 

the median EPT scores. HBI scores were fairly consistent 

among all tributary sites, falling in the “good” to “fair” categories. The ICI scores show that Fall Creek, Pleasant Run, 

and Pogues Run consistently scored poorest of the tributary 

sites, with the Pogues Run site having the greatest range in ICI 

scores. 

Three sites on the White River had a longer history of 

benthic-invertebrate data from which numbers of pollution-tolerant and -intolerant invertebrates have been calculated. Dominance by pollution-tolerant invertebrates was reversed at the 

two downstream sites (Stout and Waverly) after the WWTFs 

upgraded to tertiary treatment with ozonation. That tendency lasted until ozonation was replaced by chlorination of 

effluents in the mid-1990s. The only other change in benthicinvertebrate conditions occurred in late 1999, when a chemical release resulted in a major fish kill on the White River, 

and pollution-tolerant species again became the predominant 

benthic invertebrates present in the upper reaches 

of the study area.

Historical fish-community data indicate that most of the 

study sites have stable fish communities, with some minor 

variations from year to year. Median IBI scores show that 

the Harding and Waverly sites on the White River and the 

Pleasant Run and Pogues Run tributary sites have the poorest 

communities overall.

References Cited

Britton, L.J., 1988, Methods for collection and analysis 

of aquatic biological and microbiological samples: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 5, chap. A4, p. 37–40.

City of Indianapolis, 2000, Improving our streams in the 

City of Indianapolis—A report on options for controlling 

combined sewer overflows: prepared by Quandt Engineering, Camp, Dresser & McKee Inc., and Greeley and Hansen 

Engineers.

Crawford, C.G., Wangsness, D.J., and Martin, J.D., 1992, 

Recovery of benthic-invertebrate communities in the White 

River near Indianapolis, Indiana, USA, following implementation of advanced treatment of municipal wastewater: 

Archiv für Hydrobiologie, v. 126, no. 1, p. 67–84.

Crowder, L.B., 1990, Community ecology, in Schreck, C.B., 

and Moyle, P.B., eds., Methods for fish biology: Bethesda, 

Md., American Fisheries Society, p. 609–632.

Greeson, P.E., Ehlke, T.A., Irwin, G.A., Lium, B.W., and 

Slack, K.V., 1977, Methods for collection and analysis of 

aquatic biological and microbiological samples: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 5, chap. A4, p. 145–198.

Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1987, An improved biotic index of organic 

stream pollution: The Great Lakes Entomologist, v. 20, 

no. 1, p. 31–39.

Hoggatt, R.E., 1975, Drainage areas of Indiana streams: 

U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, 321 p.

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2000, 

Executive summary of the case filed by Indiana and the 

U.S. EPA against Guide and Crown.

Karr, J.R., and Dudley, D.R., 1981, Ecological perspectives on 

water quality goals: Environmental Management, v. 5, no.1, 

p. 55–68.
References Cited 29

Karr, J.R., Fausch, K.D., Angermeier, P.L., Yant, P.R., and 

Schlosser, I.J., 1986, Assessing biological integrity in running water—A method and its rationale: Illinois Natural 

History Survey, Special Publication 5, 28 p.

Meador, M.R., Cuffney, T.F., and Gurtz, M.E., 1993, Methods 

for sampling fish communities as part of the National Water 

Quality Assessment Program: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 93–104, 40 p.

Nelson, J.S., Crossman, E.J., Espinosa-Pérez, Héctor, 

Findley, L.T., Gilbert, C.R., Lea, R.N., and Williams, J.D., 

2004, Common and scientific names of fishes from the 

United States, Canada, and Mexico (6th ed.): Bethesda, 

Md., American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 29, 

386 p.

Newman, J.E., 1966, Bioclimate, in Lindsey, A.A., ed., 

Natural features of Indiana: Indianapolis, Indiana Academy 

of Science and Indiana State Library, p. 171–180.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 1987, Biological 

criteria for the protection of aquatic life, Volume II—Users 

manual for biological field assessment of Ohio surface 

waters (rev. 1988): Columbus, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency [variously paged].

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 1989 (first update), 

Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life, Volume 

III—Standard biological field sampling and laboratory 

methods for assessing fish and macroinvertebrate 

communities: Columbus, Ohio Environmental Protection 

Agency [variously paged].

Renn, D.E., 1998, Benthic-invertebrate and streambed-sediment data for the White River and its tributaries in and near 

Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 98–533, 159 p.

Robins, C.R., Bailey, R.M., Bond, C.E., Brooker, J.R., 

Lachner, E.A., Lea, R.N., and Scott, W.B., 1991, Common 

and scientific names of fishes from the United States and 

Canada (5th ed.): Bethesda Md., American Fisheries 

Society, Special Publication no. 20, 183 p. 

Simon, T.P., and Dufour, Ronda, 1997, Development of index 

of biotic integrity expectations for the ecoregions 

of Indiana—V., Eastern Corn Belt Plain: Chicago,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 905/R–96/002, 

68 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999, Combined 

sewer overflows—Guidance for monitoring and modeling: 

Washington, D.C., EPA 832–B–99–002 [variously paged], 

accessed January 23, 2008, at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/

pubs/sewer.pdf.

Voelker, D.C., 2004, Biological assessment of streams in the 

Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, 1999–2001: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 03–4331, 48 p.

Voelker, D.C., 2012, Biological assessment and streambedsediment chemistry of streams in the Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, 2003–2008: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5096, 53 p., 

plus 3 appendixes, http://pubs.usgs.gov//sir/2012/5096/.

Voelker, D.C., 2014, Benthic-invertebrate, fish-community, 

and streambed-sediment-chemistry data for streams in the 

Indianapolis metropolitan area, Indiana, 2009–2012: 

U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 819, 8 p., http://dx.doi.

org/10.3133/ds819.

Voelker, D.C., and Renn, D.E., 2000, Benthic invertebrates 

and quality of streambed sediments in the White River 

and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 

1994–96: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99–4276, 52 p.

Woods, A.J., Omernik, J.M., Brockman, C.S., Gerber, T.D., 

Hosteter, W.D., and Azevedo, S.H., 1998, Ecoregions 

of Indiana and Ohio: U.S. Geological Survey, 1 sheet, 

scale 1:1,500,000.

Publication services provided by the U.S. Geological Survey

Science Publishing Network

Columbus Publishing Service Center

For more information concerning the research in this report 

contact the

Director, Indiana Water Science Center

U.S. Geological Survey

5957 Lakeside Boulevard

Indianapolis, IN 46278–1996

http://in.water.usgs.gov/
Voelker and others—Benthic-Invertebrate and Fish-Community Data from Streams in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area, 1981–2012—Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5225

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20145225

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)